A/HRC/19/14 65. Zambia noted that Zimbabwe was party to several human rights instruments. It made recommendations. 66. Norway reiterated its support for the GNU and the ongoing constitutional process and hoped that it would lead to free and fair elections. However, it expressed its concerns over the cases of arbitrary arrests, detention and harassment of civil society activists, NGOs and human rights defenders. Norway made recommendations. 67. Chad noted that despite efforts made on human rights and humanitarian law, much remained to be done, especially following sanctions against Zimbabwe. It also requested information on substantive contents of specific Acts. Chad made recommendations. 68. India noted Zimbabwe’s promotion of women’s participation in politics and decision-making and the lack of specific provisions on quotas, hoping that the Constitutional review would pay attention to women and children. India commended Zimbabwe for its literacy rate. India noted food insecurity, asking how it would be confronted. India noted the Human Rights Commission, urging its compliance with the Paris Principles. 69. Mexico acknowledged Zimbabwe’s human rights achievements, particularly the Human Rights, Media, Anti-Corruption and Elections commissions, and the inclusion of MDGs in its social protection, agricultural development, health and gender equality policies. Mexico hoped that the legislative framework and administrative measures of those commissions fulfilled international standards and that the Human Rights Commission is in full compliance with the Paris principles. Mexico made recommendations. 70. The Republic of Korea acknowledged Zimbabwe’s human rights protection and promotion measures: the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission; its high literacy rate; the HIV/AIDS rate’s decrease; and GPA. It encouraged an inclusive Constitution drafting process. It noted the State’s lack of cooperation with some human rights mechanisms. Despite Zimbabwe’s efforts to promote gender mainstreaming and women’s participation in politics, it expressed concern over the primacy of customary law regarding marriage and inheritance. It made recommendations. 71. Brazil acknowledged Zimbabwe’s measures to promote food security but despite the increase in food production, it noted that food security remained an issue of concern. Brazil noted Zimbabwe’s high levels of primary-school enrolment and its literacy rate but remained concerned at the impact of poor nutrition on drop-out rates. It recognized the “de facto moratorium” in the death penalty and the constitutional debate about possibly abolishing it. Brazil made recommendations. 72. Germany was concerned about torture, ill-treatment and inhuman prison conditions, the militias and youth brigades’ widespread violence. It asked about measures taken against impunity. It referred to censorship and governmental control of media and asked how the new Constitution would safeguard press freedom. Germany commended the Human Rights Commission. It noted the Public Order and Security Act which restricted the right to assembly. Germany made recommendations. 73. Poland welcomed Zimbabwe’s participation in the UPR process. Poland made recommendations. 74. Malaysia noted Zimbabwe’s human rights challenges, mainly the economic sanctions and financial instability, the impact of HIV/AIDS, the continued drought, governance issues and corruption. Malaysia noted the GPA and its formalization into legislation as a measure of political and economic stability. Malaysia made recommendations. 10